On the one hand, Republicans are endlessly hectored about not reaching out to people of color. On the other, the Dems make it their special mission to destroy any black Republicans - not just defeat, but utterly destroy in a way that send a very clear message to any other black person who might be foolish in the future.

The polls were totally off re: Mia Love. Again, con pollsters wishin'/hopin'/prayin' rather than doing astute political scientific analysis.

But to be fair Rasmussen doesn't even attempt Congressional House polls 'cause it's just too difficult a process for them. Let alone Ras presidential/senate polls which were inaccurate again, as per usual.

holdfast said " the Dems make it their special mission to destroy any black Republican,,,"

A demonstrably false statement - Condaleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Michael Steele, etc. - all rather high profile African-American Republicans - since TWO of them were Secretary of State!!!

The problem isn't Dems "destroying" black Republicans - it's simply the natural consequence of the "Southern Strategy" started in the 1960's which resulted in the realignment of party identity by both Southern Whites (dems becoming republicans) and African Americans (republicans becoming dems).

The Republican party's done the same thing with Latinos who just voted 70% for Obama. Oh yeah - and the LGBT community didn't cast a lot of Republican votes either.

tim maguire said..."the only reason Love and West lost is that Democrats are a bunch of racists."

Wow - talk about refusing to take responsibility.

The party that just received most of the African-American and Latino vote isn't "a bunch of racists."

West is his own worst enemy. as for Love, I'm not sure but she was a black woman running in Utah against a white man. As long as the white guy was a "safe" blue-dog dem, I'd think he'd have an advantage there.

Further you seem to miss the point. I was responding to the idea that Democrats are on a mission to "destroy" black Republicans. If the Democratic party were racist minorities would not support it to the extent that they do.

@Dave and @phx, what I think tim is pointing out is that the three people you listed were all appointed to their positions because of their perceived skills and merit. Clearly Republicans have no problem working with capable people of any color. But when Republicans run African-Americans for office, the Democrats pull out all the stops not merely to beat them, but to humiliate them. I say this having been a member of the campaign staff for a Black Republican back in the day.

Regardless of your proclaimed personal admiration for Condi Rice, phx, you have to admit that the caricatures of her as "Aunt Jemima," and the oreos thrown at Michael Steele really did happen and they happened at the hands of Democrats. The closest analog I can find anywhere in history is the rage expressed by antebellum plantation owners when slaves ran away from the plantation.

@Dave, and @phx, if you were honest Progressives you'd face up to this. All of it. It's yours.

At any rate, I'm glad that West is fighting back and demanding a recount. If voter fraud did occur in his race, then the Democrats must be held accountable.

If the Democratic party were racist minorities would not support it to the extent that they do.

I could argue that their policies have largely destroyed the african-american family as we knew it via their immense compassion and caring and good intentions.

The question is should Republicans alter their brand to expand their voting base? Should they be pro-amnesty to gain Latino votes? Should they become a pro-choice party to gain single females? Should they adopt pro-welfare positions to gain inner city black votes?

Or should attempt to persuade would-be minority voters of the benefits of conservatism as the party expresses it?

tim maguire said...." how these names demonstrate that Dems don't make a point of destroying conservative Republicans? And enough with the "Southern Strategy" bugaboo already, Nixon hasn't been president in decades."

I was responding to holdfast's post in which he said, "not just defeat, but utterly destroy in a way that send a very clear message to any other black person who might be foolish in the future." which simply isn't true. There was no Democratic Party attempt to "utterly destroy" Powell or Steele or Rice or any other mainstream Black Republican.

And holdfast didn't provide any evidence to support his accusation in the case of West or Love.

West is his own worst enemy. I'm not sure about Love, but that was a race run Utah which isn't very full of wild-eyed liberals. I

Doesn't saying "If you vote against a person, you are a racist" mean you are a racist? What if you are saying that ironically, doesn't that mean you are a racist? And certainly if you mean it sincerely we can agree, that's racism, right?

You guys are getting yourselves so tied up over bogus racism charges, way more than the Dems ever did.

Regardless of your proclaimed personal admiration for Condi Rice, phx, you have to admit that the caricatures of her as "Aunt Jemima," and the oreos thrown at Michael Steele really did happen and they happened at the hands of Democrats. The closest analog I can find anywhere in history is the rage expressed by antebellum plantation owners when slaves ran away from the plantation.

Right. Portrayals of Obama as a monkey, or in black face, or comparing Michelle Obama to a gorilla because of her jaw isn't a close analog at all. You have to go WAAAAY back to antelellum history to find examples of your side being racist.

"Ha ha, look at Gallup way at the bottom, even below Rasmussen. But let's focus on the positive—PPP took top honors with a two-way tie for first place. Both their tracking poll and their weekly poll for Daily Kos/SEIU ended up with the same 50-48 margin. The final result? Obama 51.1-48.9—a 2.2-point margin."

@phx, I didn't say that there are no Republican racists. I said that there is a Democrat policy to punish Africa-Americans for leaving the plantation and running as or even voting for a Republican. That this level of intimidation keeps the rest in line I have no doubt.

As to Latins, I think the day is coming when Latin-Americans give more than 50% of their votes to Republicans.

Their message is rejected by a majority of retards that prefer being twenty trillion dollars in debt and taxed in every way possible to be taxed. Beyond what you can think of. Named different things, line items on your statements. The entire process of paying you for your services will be a matter of electronic currents in and out and through government transfers with you at a transaction point of a channel or two, or a few, and if you're clever then many, a blending of payments and layered taxations.

You dumbass retards that vote for greater taxation will get it and then some. You have a D for president that means no media watchdog. At all. None. No watchdog media at all. You'll take higher gas prices and love it because your president is a D. You'll take higher food prices until you're paying twice as much for half as much and not bat an eye because your president is a D that's what retards you are who voted and celebrated winning this retarded inexplicable twentytrillionhummityhummhumwhatwasthat goddamnit these people are retarded. And apparently hate children. That is so weird to want your children to be slaves. Jesus Christ, that whole healthcare thing is ridiculous. You dumbass retards actually bought that bullshit. You actually did. They voted out these good people that could have helped them but no the prefer to pursue twenty trillion goddamn dollars in national debt and utter slavery to taxation in paying it down. Mathematical retards all. Mention gay marriage, and I'll mention twenty trillion.

@Dave "Fine - believe what you will - amazingly the 'racists' got all those African-Americans and Latinos to vote for their guy to be President. Those Dems sure are clever."

Are Dem policies helpful to minorities?

Are not the Dem run cities and counties the ones holding minorities in intellectual and financial bondage?

How many escape extreme poverty within the Dem strongholds?

If Dems had the right policies wouldn't you see a chain from poverty to self-sufficiency in their communities?

Propaganda and indoctrination. The tool and trade of the modern democrat. Minorities are voting blocks for them to keep wealth/power. And dems keep minorities enslaved within their districts.

"Vote for me and I'll give you free stuff" ... But, it will never be an education and opportunities to raise yourself out of poverty and crime infested cities. Never a cultural identity to improve your neighborhood and life.

"Here is a handout" ... just stay a slave to my whims.

Today's democrat is still the 'owner'. Their voting districts are their 'plantation'. Taxes are their 'crop'. And they keep the poor in bondage through intimidation, fear, hate, ignorance, and indoctrination.

I completely understand now why my deaf friend withdrew. Did I ever tell you about him? Jeff. He's still around.

His whole family is deaf, Jeff most of all. The most profoundly deaf person I know, who speaks sign the clearest among all the deaf that I know, who knows English best among all the deaf that I know. Language-wise Jeff is exceedingly facile and my association with him doubled my sign-knowledge. He raised me to his level.

They wrote a lengthy article about us in the FRB newsletter. The article made people cry. I had notes left on my desk telling me that. People were deeply moved when they read the article about an ordinary thing that happened. They said they had no idea that sort of thing went on.

Anyway, Jeff looks like a blond surfer gay cartoon except he's a cowboy cartoon. A levi, western version of that. Extremely gregarious. He knew more hearing people than I knew. He introduced me to dozens of people a night. That's not an exaggeration. Jeff is adorable and gregarious and he attract people like flies and they love talking to him and writing where necessary, this preceded smart phones and the like but earlier model ATT devices were available a keypad that hook up to a handheld phone and displays a scrolling text.

This one time I was talking to Jeff and we were positioned in a club where traffic became bottlenecked into the dance area. Two people were sitting on a haystack wall observing us converse but I was unaware of them. Jeff introduced me to person after person as they filed back and forth to the dance area. A long time elapsed. Other deaf people came and went. Hearing people who had learned rudimentary sign just so they could talk to Jeff. It's really is quite amazing how many people adored Jeff and just wanted to talk to him. This went on for quite some time until finally there came about a hearing person requiring me to speak so I did and at that moment the couple observing us screamed LOUDLY and leapt off their haybail wall dashed over and clamped my body HARD "it's a miracle!"

By way of introduction. They assumed I was deaf and it appeared to their observation I was granted the gift of speech right in front of their eyes.

That's Jeff. They were watching him.

Jeff suddenly withdrew. After that it's all horses. I never understood why Jeff withdrew when he was so aggressively outgoing before that but it was like WHAM no argument, no deep dispute or anything that I knew about. We were all puzzled about why Jeff withdrew but we all just accepted it and now that's happening to me because frankly, I think half of you are straight up fucking retarded to vote for twenty trillion dollars of national debt and taxation that is truly ceaseless. Not just more government, endless thorough government, that's what you retards voted for.

"Creation of a national jobs program is essential to winning the African American vote," said the NAACP. While 60 percent put jobs and the economy at the top of their issues list, the NAACP said that "95% of all respondents believe the federal government should be engaging in job creation opportunities for all Americans."

And while the influential group said most polled believed that "success is determined by self-reliance," they also "see a very strong and important role for the federal government."

Phy wrote:Yeah, I'll tell you I don't personally have a clue anymore how to fight poverty. If you have some great ideas I'd love to hear them.

it's not that hard. The answer is jobs something that the president has not brought. Because he doesn'tKnow how to incentivize business growth and , because of his leftism has an antagonistic relationship with rich people aka the people that will bring new jobs.He's good at growing the safety net. Which is all well and good, except a safety net is supposed to be a temporary fix for people in tough situations or a supplement that assists them. And he's tried to make this replace the private sector. It's going to end really badly.He only way around it is to increase spending on govt exponentially. How much of this has reached the 8% unemployed or the millions more on food stamps. Increasing food stamps shouldn't be at the expense of people earning their own money.

Now will this END poverty as we know it? That's an impossibility. But it would go a long way towards lowering the instances of it which is the best you can expect to do

hey jr565. What's with this "Phy" btw, is your keyboard broken. I agree more jobs are always useful. We have a burgeoning population of undereducated and undertrained who in many cases aren't ready for any job, not even low-skilled jobs.

As I see it the poverty problem is very deep-rooted and not amenable to simple answers.

Which isn't intended as criticism of your proposal - just a different take.

Further you seem to miss the point. I was responding to the idea that Democrats are on a mission to "destroy" black Republicans. If the Democratic party were racist minorities would not support it to the extent that they do.

that's not true at all. There's skin tone and then there's the Uncle Tom who isn't authentically black enough orDoesn't toe the party line of identity politics. They are usually savaged by minorities worst of all.

You dumbass retards that vote for greater taxation will get it and then some. You have a D for president that means no media watchdog. At all. None. No watchdog media at all. You'll take higher gas prices and love it because your president is a D. You'll take higher food prices until you're paying twice as much for half as much and not bat an eye because your president is a D that's what retards you are who voted and celebrated winning this retarded inexplicable twentytrillionhummityhummhumwhatwasthat goddamnit these people are retarded.

Don't forget drones and kill lists. When its a dem doing it they love that shit! When it's a rethought its crimes against humanity and they suddenly become peaceniks.

The Democratic Party is on a mission to utterly destroy Black Americans, period. What metric of African-Americans doeasn't affirm that statement? Abortions? Poverty? Crime? Single-parenthood? Performance in schools? Jesus, if they ever wake up to how the Donks have conned them into trading their dignity for government cheese there will be hell to pay.

"hey jr565. What's with this "Phy" btw, is your keyboard broken. I agree more jobs are always useful. We have a burgeoning population of undereducated and undertrained who in many cases aren't ready for any job, not even low-skilled jobs.

As I see it the poverty problem is very deep-rooted and not amenable to simple answers."

And any suggestion that it might be good for people to have experience working at *any* job, so that they have a work history and develop necessary skills are met by liberals with.... charges of racism.

And any suggestion that it might be good for people to have experience working at *any* job, so that they have a work history and develop necessary skills are met by liberals with.... charges of racism.

Thank you very much.

Well, since I don't meet such suggestions with....charges of racism, what you are saying is clearly....bullshit.

hey jr565. What's with this "Phy" btw, is your keyboard broken. I agree more jobs are always useful. We have a burgeoning population of undereducated and undertrained who in many cases aren't ready for any job, not even low-skilled jobs.

As I see it the poverty problem is very deep-rooted and not amenable to simple answers.

sorry, I'm using my iPhone and I type crappily on it.

As to your point, yes there are some seriously uneducated peolple. But we just had a fresh crop of college graduates out of college looking for work and for millions here are no jobs. Those are educated people. All Obama really stressed we're infrastructure jobs as if these college grads are going into the constructionBiz. The jobs weren't actually shovel ready anyway, butThey weren't the right kind of jobs anyway. Then there are the people who were laid off and can't find new work or left the job market. Again, educated people. People who relied on jobs to feed their family. Education will not help them if there are no jobs.Finally there are the uneducated. It's not as if we haven't spent money on education in this country. Have you seem the drop out rates for Blacks? If you want to know the greatest predictor of whether someone will stay in poverty it's one, not dropping out. Then getting a job and staying in it for a long period of time and to get married while working. A lot of them therefor e haven't gotten past step one. No surprise then why they don't succeed.

So if you ask why there a bunch of uneducated people out there it's because they didn't finish school. A lot of that is personal responsibility. A lot of that is the school not adequately teaching. Why is that? Well part of it is he teachers unions who refuse to allow teachers be judged based on merit and results. No consequences for badTeaching or bad administration. Shuffling students from class to class even if they cant read. i blame the administration more than the teachers, but the dems refuse to hold the union to task. Then wonder why there are so many untrained under educated people out there . Why do you think?

But even so, there aren't jobs for them anyway so the point is largely moot. And a big portion of that is because Obama rather than stressing incentives to get business's to hire instead pushed for growth of govt.95% on blacks polled said that they wanted the govt to provide federal jobs to them. If they haven't finished high school do you think they'll cut it at the post office?

Obama has done the exact wrong things to help poor people. You look at the peoe not finding work the students not finding work and the anemic GDP and you can see how terrible he's been for poor people.

It sickens me to think about children being born into that world. For every birth certificate signed, they should bring the coroner in to sign a death certification as well -- especially if the baby is a male.

Why is there no outrage? No demonstrations? No anger? Why keep electing the same people saying the same things year in and year out, proposing the same "solutions" and for what? Has their plight radically improved? Have the solutions worked?

They given virtually all power to the same elected officials every election, and still suffer the same plight and have the same complaints?

I don't get it. I would demand some level of accountability. Or at least I would stop expecting much from those who promise the most and move on to self-reliance.

Mia Love had nothing to say. I kept hearing from outsiders that she was a tea party candidate; a fiscal conservative. Why puzzles me since she never said anything of substance. Her own leadership of a tiny town in Utah near mine decry that stance as well. Her entire campaign was "I'm not Jim Matheson." Problem is that Matheson is a very good representative so Love needed to show how she was going to be so much better and completely failed. (I think he would have won by a higher margin had it not been for the awful ads run largely by the DNC. By comparison, Matheson's own ads were very effective.)

Love should run for the state senate. Or, if Matheson runs for senate/governor, she can go after his seat again.

I haven't noticed you commenting here before so I'll ask you based on your comment now: Why are you so angry?You won. Be happy.

He's a miserable little son of a bitch; he's never going to be happy. He's been commenting here for years. He lived with his mother for quite a long time, then he got a job writing "reviews" of gay pornography, i.e. paid promotional copy, on the web. By promoting "bareback" (condom-free sex) his industry has almost single-handedly caused a sharp rise in new HIV infections and undone a decades-worth of safer-sex activism.

He once had a ruptured spleen and most of the commenters here wished him well while he was in the hospital. He used to be slightly more reasonable but I think spending his day writing about power bottoms and cum-guzzlers has significantly softened his already-spongy little brain.

What's amazing is that African-Americans have suffered greatly over the past 4 years. Young black unemployment numbers are depressingly high, and show very little signs of getting better.

Amazing and sad. I believe this goes to the "plantation" idea suggested by some others. Young blacks will vote for the "familiar" face not the performance. I hate the very idea, but it seems that way....e.g., when faced with zero prospects, a group might believe that their current sponsors, as they perceive them, are better than anything else. IOW...."Massa" is better than no food, no shelter, etc.

On the original topic of this thread...LTC Allen West....I will say it as simply as I can: I will follow and support anyone who would fire a pistol near the head of a non-uniformed enemy in order to get information to save his own mens' lives. Period. We can discuss the rest later.

"Too hot headed" isn't about firing a round "near" the head of an enemy...it would be shooting said confined enemy in the head.